I agree movies are made to be stand alone and something different from the books, if necessary. But if PJ changes everything then I see no sense in calling it "the hobbit". The LOTR films were great as stand alones and true to JRRT at the same time.

A) I thought you said the Nazguls are to be resurrected in the high-fells scene? And now you say they have already been resurrected in AUJ. The two are contradictory.

B) So when did the prophecy of the Witch-King come? After he was killed? And even if we assume they are killed in the past, then it goes against many things from LOTR. Like Eleniel said, it's not consistent with the prologue. Aragorn says "They were great Kings of men. Then Sauron the deciever gave them nine rings of power. And they all fell one by one to the power of the Ring passing into the shadow world" (something like that) Which clearly states that the men turned to wraiths when Sauron gave the Rings.

C)I am remembering the mention of Minas Ithil in one of the movies' EEs (I'm not sure). Though this claim is still understandable.

D) I won't miss the movie for just one scene. But if there are a bunch of scenes with super-deviations then I have to think twice. The movie-buff in me wants to. But if the Tolkien-nerd in me gets irritated by that then I'm thinking of DVDs.

In Reply To

You must remember, the movie adaptations are made to be stand-alone creations, they are not the books. To answer your concerns:

A) No problem at all with seeing the Witch-King as an undead wraith in AUJ-- as I said, their resurrection by the Necromancer has already happened by AUJ's timeline.

B) Again, no problem: we can easily suppose (movies) that the nine men were killed in the past. Nothing in the LOTR movies says that they weren't dead at some point; the rings corrupted them as living men, but they could still die and be put into tombs. Only later (movie) were they resurrected by the Necromancer as the Ringwraiths. That is what a "necromancer" does, brings back the dead.

C) There is no Minas Ithil in the movies-- all we ever heard in the LOTR movies was Minas Morgul, and we were never told how or when the Nazgul came there. We thus have 60 years between The Hobbit and FOTR for them to set up shop there.

A) No, my original post simply said that they were resurrected by the necromancer. This obviously happened some time well before the High Fells scene, because by the time Gandalf and Radagast come poking around, the High Fells tombs are already in the creepy, abandoned state that we see in the clip. And, of course, Radagast already saw the Witch King in wraith form when he explored Dol Guldur. How long ago they broke out of those tombs is anyone's guess.

B) (Possible Spoiler)

The prophecy of the Witch King's doom will be in DOS...and will be spoken by Tauriel. Philippa Boyens hinted at thispart of Tauriel's story arc, when she said that she will do something from out of the Appendices to LOTR that was originally done by another elf. My deduction is that she will be given Glorfindel's line at the end of the Dol Guldur battle (the Witch King and the other wraiths must survive the battle, of course). In the DOS sneak peek there were 1-2 seconds of Tauriel shown fighting orcs in what looked like Dol Guldur (it had broken stone columns and steps), so it seems that she does indeed take part in that fight. And there's a sense of synchronicity about the idea: from one female character (Tauriel) to another (Eowyn). And the writers can also have another chuckle at the expense of Glorfindel fans, as once again his place is taken by a female elf (Arwen in FOTR, Tauriel in The Hobbit). I hope you're not also a diehard Glorfindel fan!Don't mess with my favorite female elf.

Gorfindels' replacement didn't bother me much back then so that won't be too much here as well, I expect. But that's so unfortunate for the poor guy. Being muffed by a female elf everytime he actually does something. Tchk. Tchk.

As for the tomb sequence, well that does explain then. I haven't seen the scene yet,(and don't want to before the films) only heard about it.

I was wrong about the prologue - that just says 9 were given to mortal men, great kings of old...
[In reply to]

Can't Post

But you are right about the sequence when Frodo asks Aragorn about them at the Prancing Pony: Aragorn clearly states that they are undead.

Quote

Frodo: What are they?

Aragorn: They were once men...great kings of Men. Then Sauron the Deciever gave to them nine rings of power. Blinded by their greed they took them without question, one by one to fall into darkness. Now they are slaves to his will. They are the Nazgul: Ringwraiths. Neither living nor dead....

The only way this storyline works is if you ignore all Tolkien's carefully laid out history, and believe within the movieverse that the Nazgul were raised from the dead during the 400 years of peace since their bodies were entombed. "Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened." ¯ Victoria Monfort

The prophecy of the Witch King's doom will be in DOS...and will be spoken by Tauriel. Philippa Boyens hinted at thispart of Tauriel's story arc, when she said that she will do something from out of the Appendices to LOTR that was originally done by another elf. My deduction is that she will be given Glorfindel's line at the end of the Dol Guldur battle (the Witch King and the other wraiths must survive the battle, of course). In the DOS sneak peek there were 1-2 seconds of Tauriel shown fighting orcs in what looked like Dol Guldur (it had broken stone columns and steps), so it seems that she does indeed take part in that fight. And there's a sense of synchronicity about the idea: from one female character (Tauriel) to another (Eowyn). And the writers can also have another chuckle at the expense of Glorfindel fans, as once again his place is taken by a female elf (Arwen in FOTR, Tauriel in The Hobbit). I hope you're not also a diehard Glorfindel fan!

"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened." ¯ Victoria Monfort

I know many people will scream murder when it comes to this, since Tauriel is even in the movieverse a "lesser" Elf (at least this was hinted in the sneak preview in March), so where should this power come from to foresee such an event.

So I get that argument, but especially the symmetry of Eowyn and Tauriel is something I like... the idea that another female would have this feeling about the Witch-King.

Even if it is not her saying those words... I would love at least SOMEONE saying them. This would actually be a very natural way to make links to LotR without forcing it onto the audience.

LOOK, i even watched Video Blog 8 and heard the sentence (spoken from McKellen and McCoy) :

Gandalf " I need a horse" Radagast; "Where are you going?" Gandalf: "I´m searching for answers"

Could this be meant before the High Fells probably ?! Maybe they meet up with Radagast before or after Beorns House...and the "search for answers" fits perfectly to Galadriel mentioning "The riddle of the Morgul Blade must be ANSWERED"...

...Your post seems to be a non sequitur...the discussion point was whether Tauriel will prophecy the Witch King's doom. We already know that Gandalf will be at the battle of Dol Guldur, and that he probably becomes wounded somehow (Ian McKellen related the joke that they named a dummy of him "Michael Gambon") and must be carried by Galadriel. So, what does his call for a horse have to do with the topic of the prophecy of the Witch King's doom?? Don't mess with my favorite female elf.

We can say Tauriel is just more or less equal to Legolas, a protector of the wodds. So it's very unfitting (to me) for her if she recites the Witch-King's prophecy.

However, I would like it if it's given by someone worthy. Say Galadriel? She's a female. She's one of the wisest and powerful Elves. She can even foresee somethings of the future in her mirror. So, if the Witch-King's prophecy is indeed included, I cannot think of someone more befitting.

...Your post seems to be a non sequitur...the discussion point was whether Tauriel will prophecy the Witch King's doom. We already know that Gandalf will be at the battle of Dol Guldur, and that he probably becomes wounded somehow (Ian McKellen related the joke that they named a dummy of him "Michael Gambon") and must be carried by Galadriel. So, what does his call for a horse have to do with the topic of the prophecy of the Witch King's doom??

Something i already mentioned in my opening post, concerning when the scene will be placed in DoS ;-)

I think PJ (or was it Evangeline herself?) stated in the preview that they found it interesting to show a more "common" Elf, since most of those we really see doing something belong in one way or the other to the Wise amongst the Elves or at least are closely related to them. And I always liked the idea of Tauriel because of that - giving the Wood Elves a face. What we saw in the preview of the Legolas/Thranduil/Tauriel interaction looked really remarkable and memorable, imho (although I have the feeling Thranduil, if he comes across only half as epic in the movie as in the preview will outshine this whole episode).

I can live with Tauriel doing the prophecy (again, also because of the female connection) - but there has to be some sort of context WHY she is saying it and where she got it from. Maybe she is just repeating it, saying something along the lines of "As it was said... etc." . It SHOULDN'T be a random importantly-said-but-without-meaning-quote like "A red sun is rising...".

If everything else was perfect and amazing, and you know that you still had the iconic scenes with Bilbo and Smaug to come, you would walk out of the theater, just because Tauriel recited the prophecy that the WitchKing would not be killed by a man? I don't really expect that to happen, but I wouldn't really mind it. After all, Orlando Bloom's best (only good?) moment in all of the LotR films was when he recited the prophecy of Malbleth the Seer regarding the Paths of the Dead (really the only good part of PJ's rendition of the Paths of the Dead). It could be fine, or even quite good, or it could be corny and ridiculous. But even if it were the latter, it would be one bad moment, that still wouldn't compare to things like Frodo sending Sam home, or Gandalf whacking Denethor, or the green scrubbing bubbles, etc. Did you walk out of the theater then?

I really think that people tend to apply a different standard to these Hobbit films then they did to the LotR films. 'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

but one thing we don't know is when the Nazgul escaped frome these tombs/cells. It's entirely possible that they were released centuries before Gandalf's discovery, allowing them plenty of time to aid the Necromancer for his re-emergence. This would also allow for the White Council being taken by surprise at these "recent" developments, movie-verse-wise, because they thought The Nine were safely put away, completely unaware of their recent activity.

Of course not! (After all, I like to get my money's worth...;-) )
[In reply to]

Can't Post

It was an exaggeration to show my disgust with the idea, and the opinion expressed that it would be great to get the prophecy included by whatever means. Why? I'd rather it be omitted than to have it portrayed incorrectly on screen, and hopefully people will be encouraged to delve into the books to get the full story. Was anyone honestly expecting this whole Nazgul plotline along with the DG subplot? I know all I expected was a flashback to Gandalf finding Thrain in DG, a couple of WC meetings and the assault by the Wise to rout The Necromancer. Is the Nazgul tombs storyline really necessary?

No, I didn't walk out in disgust during any of the LotR films either. I went in fearing the worst with FotR and came out over the moon at how much was portrayed faithfully, or at least with the minimum of alteration. My satisfaction levels went downwards rapidly with TTT and RotK, (though that could have been improved by being split into 2 films) and of course there are things like those you mentioned that I wished had been done differently, but I don't feel the changes and additions there are necessarily in the same league as the ones we are experiencing with TH. A lot of the issues with LotR were characterization changes, particularly Faramir and Denethor, but the story was still told without as much reinterpretation or needless rewriting of M-e history as we are getting this time around .

I wouldn't say that different standards are being applied at all. The HFR/3D action blockbuster vs classic epic debate perhaps clouds the issue when comparing TH with LotR. Side by side I would still say the AUJ screenplay/scripting still falls short against LotR so far, despite many flashes of brilliance. At the end of the day, a lot of it comes down, IMO, to issues of excess/indulgence. "Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened." ¯ Victoria Monfort

...because of Philippa Boyens' comments I've always assumed that Tauriel would speak the line, but it could also work having Galadriel speak the prophecy, and Tauriel takes the role of Earnur-- she being a badass warrior wants to go kill the Witch King, but Galadriel holds her back, saying something like "Stay your hand, daughter of Mirkwood; far off yet is his doom, and not by the hand of a man."

Galadriel and Tauriel could then bond (as the only 2 female characters in the movie) and become BFFs. Then 60 years later they text each other:

***from tauriel@mirkwood*** Hey, girlfriend, your prophecy about the Witch King came true! That mortal babe from Rohan-- she bitchslapped him straight to hell! Did you see it??

***from galadriel@lorien*** Yeah, saw it in my Mirror. It's probably up on YouTube by now, so you can go catch it. High Five! Don't mess with my favorite female elf.

I think it can work in the films without too much in movie contradiction,and be a good scene from that perspective, HOWEVER
[In reply to]

Can't Post

I think it would be better for the film if they had bothered to work with the actual history, and would also have done better service to the lore and the source. The actual story is, frankly, better by far, and also more cohesive. This will work okay, but it is a degraded representation.

In Reply To

I think the tomb thing is a perfect prequel/backstory for the nazgul we know from the lotr films.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

the things that the Witch-king did after his realm of Angmar fell has nothing to do with the story of The Hobbit, there were still plenty of ways PJ could have done it so it didn't fly in the face of Tolkien's history. Then again, the Nazgul tombs aren't even the worst PJ "modification" (that would be the "resurrection" of Azog).

IMO, Jackson has so far destroyed just about all of the appendix material that he decided to utilize. The movie was great when it followed Tolkien's words, but fell short when it descended into fanfic-land. Just my opinion of course.

It troubles me thoroughly that Jackson and Boyens especially keep passing off all of their additions as being well founded in the Appendices, when in fact, half of what they have added directly and explicitly contradicts The Appendices at every turn.

In Reply To

I agree movies are made to be stand alone and something different from the books, if necessary. But if PJ changes everything then I see no sense in calling it "the hobbit". The LOTR films were great as stand alones and true to JRRT at the same time.

A) I thought you said the Nazguls are to be resurrected in the high-fells scene? And now you say they have already been resurrected in AUJ. The two are contradictory.

B) So when did the prophecy of the Witch-King come? After he was killed? And even if we assume they are killed in the past, then it goes against many things from LOTR. Like Eleniel said, it's not consistent with the prologue. Aragorn says "They were great Kings of men. Then Sauron the deciever gave them nine rings of power. And they all fell one by one to the power of the Ring passing into the shadow world" (something like that) Which clearly states that the men turned to wraiths when Sauron gave the Rings.

C)I am remembering the mention of Minas Ithil in one of the movies' EEs (I'm not sure). Though this claim is still understandable.

D) I won't miss the movie for just one scene. But if there are a bunch of scenes with super-deviations then I have to think twice. The movie-buff in me wants to. But if the Tolkien-nerd in me gets irritated by that then I'm thinking of DVDs.

In Reply To

You must remember, the movie adaptations are made to be stand-alone creations, they are not the books. To answer your concerns:

A) No problem at all with seeing the Witch-King as an undead wraith in AUJ-- as I said, their resurrection by the Necromancer has already happened by AUJ's timeline.

B) Again, no problem: we can easily suppose (movies) that the nine men were killed in the past. Nothing in the LOTR movies says that they weren't dead at some point; the rings corrupted them as living men, but they could still die and be put into tombs. Only later (movie) were they resurrected by the Necromancer as the Ringwraiths. That is what a "necromancer" does, brings back the dead.

C) There is no Minas Ithil in the movies-- all we ever heard in the LOTR movies was Minas Morgul, and we were never told how or when the Nazgul came there. We thus have 60 years between The Hobbit and FOTR for them to set up shop there.

D) Aw, see it anyway.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

WTF!!!!! That better be false. If Tauriel opens her mouth and speaks Glorfindel's prophecy in a film
[In reply to]

Can't Post

that doesn't even acknowledge Glorfindel and gives Lindir a damned cameo. . . . I will start to feel about Phillipa the way Gollum came to feel about Bilbo after the latter ran out of the caves with a certain piece of high end jewlery in his possesion. . . FOREVER!!!

In Reply To

A) No, my original post simply said that they were resurrected by the necromancer. This obviously happened some time well before the High Fells scene, because by the time Gandalf and Radagast come poking around, the High Fells tombs are already in the creepy, abandoned state that we see in the clip. And, of course, Radagast already saw the Witch King in wraith form when he explored Dol Guldur. How long ago they broke out of those tombs is anyone's guess.

B) (Possible Spoiler)

The prophecy of the Witch King's doom will be in DOS...and will be spoken by Tauriel. Philippa Boyens hinted at thispart of Tauriel's story arc, when she said that she will do something from out of the Appendices to LOTR that was originally done by another elf. My deduction is that she will be given Glorfindel's line at the end of the Dol Guldur battle (the Witch King and the other wraiths must survive the battle, of course). In the DOS sneak peek there were 1-2 seconds of Tauriel shown fighting orcs in what looked like Dol Guldur (it had broken stone columns and steps), so it seems that she does indeed take part in that fight. And there's a sense of synchronicity about the idea: from one female character (Tauriel) to another (Eowyn). And the writers can also have another chuckle at the expense of Glorfindel fans, as once again his place is taken by a female elf (Arwen in FOTR, Tauriel in The Hobbit). I hope you're not also a diehard Glorfindel fan!

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."